Should application architects write code?

Answer 1

As Vlion stated, asking this question in a community overwhelmingly dominated by developers means the answers will be skewed towards "yes".

As somebody who has "architect" in his job title but who was also recently awarded the badge of "Distinguished Engineer", my loyalties are torn. In general, I think coding is not usually an effective use of an architect's time. So what should I be doing?

• Understanding the business.
• Understanding the systems used to enable the business.
• Working with the business on IT strategy and tactics.
• Making sure current projects are being done with a long-term view, where the project manager concentrates on the short-term view.

So how should an architect keep in touch with reality? I think by regular meetings and walkarounds, just talking to people at every level and oiling the wheels of communication.

Answer 2

Yes, to keep their coding experience.

Answer 3

Even if your argument against coding is valid, I think it's important for the dev team to respect you and your design decisions. If you "suffer the consequences" of your architecture decisions right along with them, then they're much less likely to question them.

All the time, I see architects who are out of touch with the coding side, and whose dev teams know it. They don't get much respect.

Answer 4

You're asking this on a coding site. You're going to get basically everyone falling on the "yes" side.

My perspective is, yes, but only enough to keep up with the changing needs, no more

Answer 5

I think the role of architecture is changing. I see less and less ivory tower architects that design a whole system for the lowly programmers to implement in a waterfall process.

When doing iterative projects communication between architects and programmers gets more important. The architect is part of a team and should be able to handle changing requirements and new ideas together with the programmers. In situations like this the job of an architect and a programmer are more closely related. I've seen teams where the dev-leads took on the role of architects deliver well thought out architectures for really complicated solutions.

edit In reply to comment
I think in the distinction between application, solution and enterprise architect is a bit artificial and doesn't really fit in many cases. Roles like security architect, data architect etc. give a far clearer disinction between responsibilities. You can look here for more details http://stevendwright.home.comcast.net/~stevendwright/ArchRoles.htm

By the way, from reading your question again I noticed that many of the arguments against coding architects seem to indicate a strong management/leadership role for the architect. I think it's a good idea to separate the management and architecture roles. It's better to have your technical people divide their time between coding and architecture than between management and architecture.

Answer 6

Ab-so-frickin-lutely

There's nothing worse than an Architect who has lost touch with reality.

It's part of the job to keep your feet on the ground and your head in the clouds.